El2aZeR

Except CV mechanics treat every CV encounter as a 1vsX, meaning whether there is an additional CV or not in the match is completely meaningless. It doesn't even change the ratio of default losses/wins a side suffers since the chance of getting a good teammate is equally as high as getting a good enemy. In fact having constant 2vs2 CV battles might actually increase unicum CV WR since normally two enemies will essentially be treated as afk instead of just one. Meanwhile the skilled CV player has a teammate that is highly unlikely to die regardless of how incompetent he is, saving points. Meanwhile if the CV teammate is even remotely good the match is practically won by default to an even more ridiculous degree than in a 1 CV per side situation.

Which matters... how exactly? Everyone faces the same MM, no?

I'm not. And the numbers paint a very clear picture. There is only one class that is severely overperforming and it sure isn't DDs. DPM is a theoretical metric and as such completely useless. In reality CVs are the most effective and thus best damage dealers in the entire game.

Which I suppose is why the solo WR ceiling for all classes except CVs is roughly 75%? Laughable.

I've observed that too actually. In fact I struggled to remember even meeting a single one on either side until that particular individual came to mind. It's a bit weird given that maplesyrup still lists Fletcher as the most popular US tech tree DD but then again USN DD numbers aren't remotely as high as they used to be to begin with. The most popular DDs are indeed either IJN or EU. We can also just talk about those if you'd like. It's just that the examples of strong RTS AA ships compared to their AA now showcases how weak AA has become much better. But sure, lets talk IJN BBs and DDs. Kongo with a sealclubbing AA spec actually stood a reasonable chance to defend itself from T4-5 air attacks. That is no longer the case. Fuso and Nagato had terrible AA that could only cause lower tier CVs a bit of grief if even that, nowadays they cannot cause any CV grief no matter the MM. Amagi had decent enough AA when specialized for it and could cause same tier strikes to be costly, also no longer true. Izumo AA was and still is a sad sight to see. Yamato with a few points invested into AA could make lower tier CV attacks costly, now I'm actually pretty sure even T4 CVs are able to press an attack on it fairly easily. Kii deserves a special mention as a premium as it had effective AA back then and laughable AA now. Meanwhile IJN torp DDs had terrible AA back then and terrible AA now. The gunboat IJN DDs actually had excellent AA if specialized for it which is why Akizuki for example was a highly popular pick in competitive when KotS was still played in T8. Nowadays IJN gunboat AA is almost as sad as their torp focused counterparts. So, there is your comparison. RTS AA still remains objectively superior in effectiveness. As for RN CVs, that is one "ineffective" line out of 4, meaning they are not a standard in any way, shape or form. KM CVs are highly situational but then very powerful, both IJN and USN CVs are the golden standard to measure against and their performance is extremely high. RN CVs are the exception to the rule, as such can be dismissed as anything but maybe as an example of how a balanced rework should perhaps look like, aka nerf every other line down to their level. That however will inevitably kill off the rework.

But you can just dodge it until it stops appearing tho? I really don't see the issue. Committing a drop happens inside 3.5km anyway even with torps and you can roughly judge the distance via which clouds the AA tracers are coming out of. That I can imagine what with the general CV playerbase being.... sub-par. Meanwhile the last time I saw a DFAA Fletcher he unfortunately put too much trust into his AA and died immediately.

Flak is based on your own speed and heading, meaning you are in full control over flak the entire time. That you cannot see the source is frankly completely irrelevant.

Sure, still doesn't mean it isn't possible nor is it particularly difficult especially with the spotting indicator. Ships cannot move anywhere quickly within 30-60 seconds unlike aircraft. Besides, aircraft not spotting torps has been suggested multiple times in RTS as well, it is hardly something unique to the rework. No they cannot as CVs can get planes above you every minute and know pretty much exactly where you are on approach thanks to once again the spotting indicator. It is objectively way worse. You are not very good at using the spotting indicator then. Another 4 shots coming up. - Pretty much every Mino I ran into ran at least AFT + AA range. Again, build diversity wasn't a thing back then and it certainly isn't now. There was no choice but to take AA skills because everything else had even less value. That you had to avoid one just speaks volumes about how much more effective counterplay was, no? What if there is a Mino on both flanks? Something like this? Or what if there is a single ship just locking down 2 caps? Just avoid them I guess? But that in itself means it was an effective countermeasure against CVs that no longer exists, no? - Wrong, infinite boost was removed, boost feathering is still a thing. There is a difference. - You will kill a ship in 3 mins just as quickly in a reworked CV as you would in a RTS one. You're somehow under the delusion that reworked CVs deal less damage than RTS ones over the same timespan which is only true in T6. On every other tier CVs maintain the same or even higher damage potential. - I see plenty complaining about AA not being as effective as before which still holds true. - Perhaps you forget that I still played RTS up until roughly half a year ago. Wanna know what typically happened when I spotted a Kidd, Grozovoi or even just a Gearing at the beginning of the match? My entire strike got either partially or completely wiped out for pretty much nothing. And if a DD just stuck within 7-8km of an AA ship depending on which one it was then it was untouchable unlike now where you need to be within 2km to achieve effective AA coverage since long range AA is pathetically weak. - I see you are unfamiliar with RTS AA mechanics. Hint: That the fighters were locked had no effect on their HP since RTS wasn't a DPS vs HP calculation to begin with. Also fighters had the highest HP out of all planes in RTS, if those had been bombers they would have died even quicker.

From mid to high tiers there were plenty of ships which could make an effective AA ambush, including several DDs. Some of which didn't even need DFAA to wipe out entire strikes. AA range and even BFT was actually a staple inclusion in many recommended builds and I rarely faced ships which didn't have it specialized. It's not like build diversity was a thing back then anyway nor is it now. What else were you going to pick as e.g. a Minotaur? Fire prevention? Vigilance? Expert Marksman? I agree that forcing players to spec AA to have a chance to defend against an air strike was stupid, but at least it was an option. Nowadays it doesn't matter whether you spec AA or not, if the enemy CV is competent you're dead regardless. That's somehow better? Boost feathering as well as preserving momentum is still a thing indeed. A T10 RTS strike typically took 3-4 minutes to cycle. In the end considering AA strength and losses reworked and RTS CVs come out to roughly the same damage over time. Depending on target reworked CV striking capability is even superior, meanwhile there is pretty much nothing that a RTS CV kills faster than a reworked one. I did not say that it was more fun. It was however undoubtedly more effective. And that is the main point. You can still get a bearing on a DDs position by following torps now. DD could easily juke you out if you did not have a strike available right at that moment since it again took 3-4 mins to cycle. A DD can literally switch flanks in that time and you'd be nonethewiser. And? Does that somehow change the ease with which it is possible to find a DD now? There are different indicators for air and surface spotting. Spotting by other ships can also be used to triangulate DD position ironically. That's 4 shots guys. Drink up! Looks rather effective to me.

3 out of 4 DDs dead by my hand while the enemy CV has yet to accomplish anything. Would proceed to bag myself the 4th when we were cleaning up the enemy. Truly much better than having the DDs fight each other and being able to support them at that. /s

Don't believe so. Aside from the fact that you can use your own detection as well as a bit of minimap awareness to discern where a DD is in the current system, so even if you have to fly almost on top of the to actually see them, finding them tends to be fairly easy. Previously in RTS you had no indication of whether your planes are spotted or not and needed to rely solely on minimap awareness, which enabled some surface ships to set up some pretty nasty ambushes wiping a good chunk or maybe even all of your planes before you can react.

This is a laughable lie. Ships with weaker AA in RTS now also have even weaker AA in the rework. Baiting in itself implies a misplay by the target. Ironically I could have done much more in a reworked CV in that particular match as I wouldn't have needed to fight the enemy CV and avoid AA heavy ships up until the cyclone hit. T10 planes back in RTS also had speeds equivalent to T4 planes boosted nowadays so maneuverability is a non-factor and strike execution/cycling is much faster. Lets play a drinking game everyone, shall we? Take a shot every time @Pikkozoikum is being blatantly dishonest. I guarantee you will be drunk within a few minutes.

And if the enemy CV just kills your DD while your CV is too incompetent to both spot and kill the enemy DD, what exactly is the difference then? Other than that you are relying on the ability of a single player rather than multiple ones which is objectively much worse?

Dann ist die Feststellung, dass deine Probleme nichts mit Spielmechaniken sondern allein mit dir zu tun haben ebenfalls kein statshaming, oder? Was der Bereich hier ist kümmert mich nicht, was mich kümmert ist, dass du hier großartig Ausreden rausposaunst um deine eigene Unfähigkeit zu verdecken. Lesen tut gut. Und was den ersten drop anbelangt, ich hatte angenommen dass der Typ nicht in die Insel drehen würde da er da dann festhängen und draufgehen würde. Wurde anschließend halt wie erwartet von meinen Teammates zerbrezelt, somit war das kalkuliertes Risiko und so oder so für mich win-win. Wenn sich solche Spieler darüber beschweren, dass der Rasen ab und zu Nass ist oder die es unfair finden, dass der Torwart mal ab und zu einen Elfer hält, klar.

Kann man durch die absurde Manövrierfähigkeit der DBs im Angriff durchaus machen, jo. Sogar 180° Angriffe sind möglich. Einfache Beispiele: Und wenn du hier schon am statshamen bist, ich glaube nicht dass deine stats in der Midway dich dafür qualifizieren zu sagen, was das Schiff kann oder nicht. Wenn du eine Hinden nicht zeitnah rausnehmen kannst liegt das an dir. Von daher anstatt dir hier mit "wie einfach es ist sich gegen einen CV zu verteidigen" groß Ausreden einfallen zu lassen könntest du die Energie auch dafür verwenden besser zu werden. Dann können sich deine Ziele nicht mehr wehren.

Oh look, all 4 enemy DDs dead either directly or indirectly by my hand while the enemy CV hasn't managed to do anything yet. In fact he is actually about to die. Such a great equalizer CVs are, no? /s

Do everyone a favor then and uninstall.

And if your CV is too stupid to attack and kill the enemy DD while the enemy CV is not, that too creates unequal teams. In fact because there is no counter against CVs while there are to DDs it becomes even more unequal. Once again utterly fallacious argumentation. Or alternatively blatantly dishonest.

I do it by recording a video then converting it and reducing its filesize online here: https://ezgif.com/

Sure, just angle lol. Not like most of them turn faster than you for no aiming penalty. Guess what the CV has that other classes do not? - unlimited range - unparalleled speed - practically no risk to neither weapons nor HP - unnatural weapon reliability - best map control by far - best spotting ability by far - highest flexibility by far etc. etc. etc. To compare CV ability to surface ship ability ultimately only proves that CVs are superior in almost every aspect. Anecdotal and fallacious. If the enemy CV is terrible, he won't be able to kill you no matter what ship you're sailing because the outcome of the engagement hinges almost solely on the skill of the CV player. See gifs above.

Wrong, that is your own fault for not paying attention as there is actual counterplay to long range fire from BBs. There is none against CVs. So now you're implying @Chaos_Umbra is a terrible surface ship player? Are you for real? And again, surface ship player skill does not factor in survivability against CVs. I would have actually been much better served with a Lexington in that particular match due to a lack of targets for AP DBs. And even back then Enterprise would not have been able to press an attack on an Atlanta with DFAA equipped. That just makes RTS objectively superior in counterplay options for surface ships. So you're a terrible CV player then. Why exactly is that relevant? and other jokes you can tell yourself. It isn't impossible to win against even the best of players. This is because default losses happen thanks to random MM, if your team full of potatoes dies faster than you can kill the enemy then it simply becomes impossible to win thanks to point and time restrictions. It's simply the nature of the game and why the solo WR ceiling is about 75% for surface ships and roughly 85% for CVs. It is also why even afk bots can achieve a ~25% WR, aka win every 5th match they play. Fact however remains that CVs are far more influential and as such have a much higher solo WR ceiling. It is wrong to say that they can carry everything, but that doesn't make them any less broken. Essentially a single unicum CV player is statistically worth as much as an entire unicum division. Which was also the case in RTS, so nothing has changed. Also this was the match up @Chaos_Umbra found himself in. The enemy CV lost him that match by not attempting to kill me when I was roughly 15km from him and engaged by another ship but instead chose to farm my imbeciles instead. Said imbeciles managed to lose a 3vs1 in Missouri, Soyuz and Massa against an enemy Musashi by virtue of firing HE, but unfortunately by the time he had done so I already killed the enemy CV and won the match. Cleaning him up was a formality. So much for "skill gap is fixed", huh?

Influence of CVs has statistically remained the same. You disagreeing therefore just makes you factually wrong. Part of CV skill is also how to deny the enemy surface ship their supposed counters, meaning that the outcome of the engagement depends solely on the skill of the CV player. Possessing knowledge that whatever you do, if the enemy CV is skilled enough he will just make it null and void doesn't help you in any way, shape or form. Been there, done that. In fact @BLUB__BLUB has seen it happen fairly recently, no? This is an oxymoron. Due to the extreme influence of the class the basis of just a not completely incompetent CV player starts at 60%+ WR. See Gibbins or TopTier for example who are terrible CV players who have only grasped, not even mastered the fundamental basics yet can easily manage unicum stats. Weird how you measure RTS CVs by only their most powerful representatives then. Like, how many RTS CVs could actually oneshot a full HP same tier BB in a single strike? The low and mid tiers couldn't, the high tiers only if they either baited DCP or used AP bombs on a very narrow band of targets. It is funny that you keep insisting on comparing the most powerful RTS CVs to only the weakest rework ones. Could it be that you have no interest in an actually fair comparison to begin with? Except you do not since a method of effectively influencing airspace no longer exists. This is a laughable fallacy. Facts don't care about your feelings. Now no ship has good AA anymore and DFAA is largely worthless. How exactly is this supposed to be an improvement? Lets ask @Chaos_Umbra for example who has just faced me in his Atlanta with DFAA equipped. How did it go attempting to cover your teammates or defending yourself from air strikes?

Fara explains it in the video. The Gearing used DFAA and thus caused the torps to spread out, making for a fairly easy dodge.

You are more dependent on your own CV player to not be terrible in the rework as you completely lack options as a surface ship to counter the enemy CV as has already been proven. So, for how long will you disappear only to come back spouting the same blatant lies once again this time?